everything you have heard about this movie is true.

If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

Blistering performances.

I know, I know. The movie version of a novel doesn't usually meet the expectations of the reader resp. the viewer. Especially if the text is as masterfully written as the Henry James novella "The Turn of the Screw". But shouldn't a good film stick to the main idea of the novel? Which in this case is not only the nature of certain underlying motives for the main characters' actions but also the ambiguity of these motives. James's novella is not just a simple ghost story. It's a subtle psychological probe of a person's state of mind, using literary means. This can also be achieved with cinematic means if the screen writer and the director and the editor of the film are up to their tasks. The best examples for successful achievements in this area are Roman Polanski's "The Tenant" and Stanley Kubrick's "The Shining". But you don't have to be a genius to make a good mystery movie. You should just avoid the usual stereotypes and the cheap tricks and the obvious traps that come with the genre.So, if you have read the novella and liked it don't watch this movie. If you just want to watch a simple horror movie this one might be a good catch. But don't pretend, in one of your next party small talks, that you've read James's novella. You might get psyched out.

Bit of a yawn I'm afraid, but then Deborah Kerr's, "THE INNOCENTS"is a hard act to follow. That has the advantage of being shot in stunning black and white for starters which I think creates an eerie, unsettling atmosphere throughout which this colour version fails to do. Yes I may have jumped at one point but at no time was there anything to send a real chill down my spine. The subtle, ghostly appearances in "THE INNOCENTS" were much more effective in achieving that in my opinion. I wish I could be more positive in my review of "The Haunting of Helen Walker" as it started well and engaged me. I was really hoping for something a bit special. I cannot fault the acting and overall production, but it just simply looked too glossy and lacked atmosphere for my liking, but at least I saw it through to the end.

I'm a big fan of Valerie Bertinelli; she's a very lovely and under-rated actress, and she does very well in this movie. The problem is that "A Turn of the Screw" by Henry James has been done too many times with little variations or deviations from the original novel. Done best as "The Innocents" (1961), the plot was only really done differently and interestingly on "Dark Shadows" with David Selby and Terry Crawford. The Bertinelli movie is very scary and has great convincing special effects, but some problem does rest in the direction and execution. She finds all these clues that something is wrong at the estate she works on, but it is hard to tell just how all these clues relate to each other once you realize that the children are under the thrall of two ghosts who hate each other. The movie on its own is a very top-notch ghost story, but you have to be totally unaware of the original novel to appreciate it.

In agreement with the other comments, I too was skeptical with Valerie Bertinelli in the part of the governess in basically an all British film. But she was surprisingly very good. I also agree that this was a very scary movie. The effects were great, not overboard. The actor portraying Peter Quint was diabolical looking. Think about how difficult it is to act without being able to speak....very interesting. Diana Rigg, as always was great in her role. The children were okay, the boy had a tendency to squint, but when his eyes were open, he was a very handsome child. The film location was perfect for this type of movie, kind of pseudo-gothic. If you like horror, I would definitely recommend this movie.